Tarr v. Stearman’s Empirical Analysis
1914
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently December 2011 · most notably 225 Ill. 2d 52 - Mohanty v. St. John Heart Clinic, S.C. (2006), The Parkway Baking Company, Inc. (Plaintiff), National Bakers Services, Inc. (Plaintiff) v. Freihofer Baking Company (Inc.) (Defendant) William Freihofer Baking Company (Additional Defendant), National Bakers Services, Inc . (Additional Defendant), National Bakers Services, Inc., the Parkway Baking Company, Inc. (Plaintiff), National Bakers Services, Inc. (Plaintiff) v. Freihofer Baking Company (Inc.) (Defendant), William Freihofer Baking Company (Additional Defendant), National Bakers Services, Inc . (Additional Defendant), the Parkway Baking Company, Inc. (1958)
1 federal appellate · 30 state decisions — followed in 10 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Fowle v. Park · Hursen v. Gavin · Marshall v. Vicksburg · Ryan v. Hamilton · Southern Fire Brick & Cray Co. v. Garden City Sand Co.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Courts of equity, as well as courts of law, recognize the rights of the parties to a contract to stipulate for penalties and forfeitures, but it is a rule of universal application that courts of equity will never affirmatively enforce either a penalty or a forfeiture. (2 Story’s Eq. Jur.—13th ed.—sec. 1319; 16 Cyc. 80.) It is a well settled and familiar doctrine that a court of equity will not interfere on behalf of the party entitled thereto and enforce a forfeiture, but will leave him to his legal remedies, if any, even though the case might be one in which no equitable relief would be given to the defaulting party against the forfeiture. The few apparent exceptions to this doctrine are not real exceptions. In fact, there are no exceptions. Those which appear to he so all depend upon other rules and principles. ’ ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Harlan v. McGraw““It has always been the policy of the law to promote the freedom of engaging in and carrying on all kinds of trades and professions which are beneficial to the public. (2 Pomeroy’s Eq. Jur., 3d ed., see. 934.) Formerly by the common law all contracts in restraint of trade were void. (24 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 2d ed., 842.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.